[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 162 (Thursday, October 19, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Page S15342]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. BROWN:
  S. 1338. A bill to improve the U.S. Marshals Service, and for other 
purposes; to the Committee on the Judiciary.


               united states marshals service legislation

 Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I introduce a bill to improve the 
U.S. Marshals Service by eliminating the political appointment of U.S. 
Marshals.

  Since 1789, U.S. Marshals have been appointed by the President and 
confirmed by the Senate. For nearly 150 years this political 
appointment process served as the only control Washington had over its 
primary law enforcers. The distance between the bureaucracy of 
Washington and the ever expanding Territories of the United States gave 
U.S. Marshals such as Wyatt Earp and Lloyd Garrison, nearly autonomous 
control in their jurisdictions.
  But the days of the gun-slinging Federal Marshal are long past. Today 
the executive office of the Marshals Service in Washington calls the 
shots, trains, and promotes the deputies, and operates under the 
watchful eye of the Department of Justice and Congress. The one area in 
which the Service does not have control is over the appointment of U.S. 
Marshals.
  Under the current system, U.S. Marshals are appointed to 4-year terms 
by the President. Appointees need not have served in the U.S. Marshals 
Service or even have had previous professional law enforcement 
experience. In fact, of the 94 U.S. Marshals, only 30 have previously 
served in the Marshals Service.
  According to a 1994 U.S. Marshals Service Reinvention Proposal 
reported by the Department of Justice, the appointment process has 
become a burden upon the operations of the Marshals Service. The 
proposal states that:

       Disagreement between Marshals and headquarters often put 
     career deputies and staff in conflicting situations. The 
     Marshals controlled day-to-day assignments while headquarters 
     controlled the deputies' career advancement and duty 
     stations. The traditional independence of the Marshals 
     clashed with the growing central control of headquarters. 
     Headquarters began bypassing the Marshals by establishing 
     program units in the field to oversee witness security, 
     fugitive investigations, asset forfeiture programs, and high 
     level judicial protection activities.

  Mr. President, my bill would eliminate some of these problems by 
putting experienced law enforcement personnel into the office of U.S. 
Marshal. The bill would require the Attorney General to select U.S. 
Marshals from the ranks of the Marshals Service rather than from a 
political party. The U.S. Marshals Service already has an extensive and 
complex merit based promotion system to evaluate, select and promote 
the most qualified individuals for positions in every level of service. 
This bill would extend that type of merit based selection to the office 
of the U.S. Marshal, so that the most qualified and experienced 
personnel are in a position to contribute to the U.S. Marshals Service 
rather than hinder its operations.
  Removing the political appointment process from the Marshals Service 
is not a new idea. The reform debate first began in 1955 when the 
Commission on Organization of the Executive Branch of the Government 
recommended an end to the political appointment of U.S. Marshals. 
During the 104th Congress, the idea took hold in the House of 
Representatives. Both the House Balanced Budget Task Force and the 
Budget Committee recommended ending the political appointments. Vice 
President Gore's National Performance Review also recommended selecting 
Marshals by merit and estimated a savings of over $36 million.

  With such broad based support why are we waiting? The answer lies in 
the Senate. For the past 150 years the Executive branch has allowed the 
Senators affiliated with the President's party to select the U.S. 
Marshals for the judicial districts within their States. Each time the 
idea of appointing Marshals based on merit was raised, it was quashed 
in the Senate by those unwilling to relinquish the power of 
appointment.
  Mr. President, if we really are for a leaner, less intrusive, and 
more effective government, we must begin by promoting the most 
qualified personnel to the most important positions. Let us take a real 
step to improve the way government works--let us end the political 
appointment process for the U.S. Marshals.
                                 ______